Letters to the Editor
‘All in’ for school tax
Editor, The Sun:
As a lifelong Woodford County resident and 1985 WCHS graduate, I am all in for the proposed facilities tax to enable us to build a new high school.
Public schools are funded with our tax dollars and look to their communities for funding. Since 2009, our school taxes have only increased 18 cents (per $100 dollars of property value). This represents an average of 2.25 cents per year, and we have the second lowest school tax rate when compared to our surrounding counties.
No one likes a tax increase, but what other tax can you pay and simultaneously make an investment in your community and the lives of your children?
I am very proud of what the children of our community have accomplished, including our high school being ranked 13th in the state by U.S. News and World Report. What more could they accomplish with a new high school and the extra tools to succeed in the 21st century?
Why would we not vote “for” on June 26th?
Kandi Neal Woodford County
Rethinking the U-Haul Plan
Editor, The Sun:
I live on Marsailles Drive, and while I have reservations, I now think that with creative engagement with the community by U-Haul, their plan is feasible and far better than many alternatives.
Opposition to the U-Haul store and vehicle fleet has no basis other than appearance. Permitted activities in the current zoning include used-car lots, and renting used vehicles is a directly “similar activity” to selling used vehicles. There would be no legal basis to oppose a used-car dealership with all the attendant hoop-la. A well-maintained yard of 20 or 30 trucks and trailers is a much better option.
Community concerns could be addressed by requiring two additions to the plan. The first is a landscape plan to create visual screening and a signature entry to the community along U.S. 60. The second is a designated, orderly, and professional parking plan for U-Haul vehicles. Any car rental agency or old Army sergeant knows how to do this.
The conversion of major space from commercial to industrial usage as currently defined is more problematical. Mini-warehousing is assigned to a different zone, and no amount of wordsmithing can change this. If business A rents 100 small spaces in three buildings for storage of personal or business property, and business B rents 200 identical small spaces under one roof, they are both renting mini- warehouse spaces. But I believe this can be addressed in a manner which will maintain the overall character of the site and its usage.
The building has leased small business spaces facing U.S. 60. U-Haul will open new retail business frontage facing the parking lot including vehicular doors for a service bay and make interior modifications to create small rental spaces. It would take little additional investment to include several store-front spaces on the parking lot face of the building.
This modification to appearance and balance of usage would generally conform to existing zoning. The community would gain additional spaces to encourage small business and entrepreneurship. U-Haul would add higher value spaces to its overall rental plan. That’s a win-win.
Action by the Planning Commission to require a landscaping and signage plan beneficial to the community tenants, an operational parking plan, and an expanded rental strategy for the property can create a sustainable and profitable plan for U-Haul and the community.
Finally, I do want to acknowledge U-Haul’s courtesy in holding a public meeting on this issue.
David L. Arnold Versailles